Many Catholics have recently considered what our response should be to President Trump's executive orders regarding immigrants and refugees. Kathy Schiffer and Msgr. Charles Pope, for example, considered the issue in light of their reading of the Catechism of the Catholic Church and some of the writings of St. Thomas Aquinas. I previously addressed this issue as well, arguing that we Christians have a duty to care for immigrants, but I think more needs to be said on this issue.

I agree with all parties to the conversations that our nation has a duty to protect the common goods of her citizens. Our government should regulate immigration in a way that brings about the good of our nation and of those coming into our nation. We should care for their needs, as we are able, as is clearly stated in the Catechism (see CCC 2241). It is clear that we cannot sustain an unlimited number of immigrants as a nation. So, I agree that reassessing current regulations and law and seeking to enforce it well are good things. However, it is also clear that we are obliged to do so in a way that is least detrimental to those refugees who really need our help. A period of 120 days may be the difference between life and death for some people, as presented in the stories in this article by Peter Jesserer Smith. Immigration reform can be done without placing a ban on immigration to the detriment of those who need our help now and of our foreign relations with these nations and the people within them.

Taking action to help refugees is a separate issue from protecting our nation from those who would truly seek to harm us through terrorist acts and drug and human trafficking. So by all means, let us screen the people seeking entry into our country.

However, there are already people in our country, legally and illegally, who are sending aid to their families in other countries, such as Mexico. It is easy to look at those people and begrudge them their income being sent abroad, but rather than blame them for harming our economy, should we not look with generosity on the people being fed and clothed. We are in danger of being like the rich man to the poor man Lazarus that Christ spoke of in the parable in the Gospel of Luke. Lazarus sat at the rich man’s gate day in and day out, and the rich man never lifted a hand to help Lazarus. When they both died, Lazarus was shown the mercy he never received from the rich man, and the rich man was sent to a life of eternal torment (Luke 16:19-31). Who are we, a rich nation, to not care for those poor families. Illegal immigration and families separated are both huge problems, but they need to be solved in a way that brings about the good of all involved, the poor and the rich.

There is a fear among many Catholics that Muslims who immigrate to our country are seeking, in the end, to make our nation a Muslim nation. It makes sense a faithful Muslim would seek to follow the laws and teachings of his or her faith. In the same way, we as Catholics follow the truths of our faith above those of our nation. We petition for religious liberty when asked to violate our consciences in paying for contraception and abortion with our taxpayer dollars or in our private businesses. We worry about what our children might learn in the public school systems where falsehoods about gender, marriage, and sexuality are taught. We pray and seek the conversion of our whole nation. We, too, as people believing that our faith is the means of salvation for all humanity, seek our laws to be in accord with truth.

But since we know by faith that Christ will triumph in the end, we should let the radical charity that Christ calls us to trump the fear that we have of living under sharia law. We should welcome with Christian charity those of other faiths seeking refuge here, and seek to evangelize them and provide for their material needs, even at the risk of our own lives and those of our children. Jesus calls us to take up our crosses and follow him on the way of charity, and having done so, we are not to worry about tomorrow.

A passage from St. Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae,Question 105, article 3 of the Prima Secunda, has been cited in support of keeping particularly those who are Muslim out of our country. However, the use of this passage has been taken out of context. In this part of the Summa St. Thomas is explaining the precepts of the Old Law and justness of it for the Israelites, and it is from here that arguments have been drawn against immigration of those who could be our enemies. When read in context, however, in the previous Question 104, which lays the groundwork for Question 105, St. Thomas explains how the law of the Old Testament no longer holds in the New Covenant.

The judicial precepts did not bind for ever, but were annulled by the coming of Christ: yet not in the same way as the ceremonial precepts. For the ceremonial precepts were annulled so far as to be not only "dead," but also deadly to those who observe them since the coming of Christ, especially since the promulgation of the Gospel. On the other hand, the judicial precepts are dead indeed, because they have no binding force: but they are not deadly(I-II, q. 104, a. 3.)

Question 105, which considers how Israel was commanded to deal with foreigners, is about these judicial precepts of the Old Law. These precepts no long have any binding force. It is true that St. Thomas says that these precepts "are not deadly"--that is, while they are no longer binding, it is permissible (but certainly not required) to follow them. However, I think that if we want a more complete picture of how we should consider such laws and how they could be applied today, we must look at them (as St. Thomas himself does) in light of what Christ taught us in the New Testament. We should remember that the Old Law, with its prescriptions regarding foreigners, was given by God to train his people for the coming of Christ, but in the New Testament, Christ asks us to raise our love of neighbor to a new level.

""You have heard that it was said, `You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same?And if you salute only your brethren, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect. (Matthew 5:43-48)

The radical love of the Gospel is a much higher call than that of the Old Testament. And perhaps it sounds a little scary to love those who could be our enemy. The Islamic State and terrorism are real threats to our physical lives. Christians in predominately Muslim countries face the threat of the loss of their lives everyday. Yet, this potential threat in our country is one that should not keep us from extending radical charity and hospitality to those who come to us in real need regardless of their faith or their intentions. St. Thomas even states in the Summa in the Treatise on Charity that it is necessary for our salvation that we assist our enemies when they are in urgent physical need (see II-II, q. 25, a. 9).

In some ways I envy Christians who live under a more outward and physical persecution than we do in the United States. They can live more radically the call to persevere in their faith under a persecution.

If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. For what will it profit a man, if he gains the whole world and forfeits his life? (Matthew 16:24-26)

Christians in the United States have lived under the persecution of the cloud of the last eight years of a government hostile to our religious liberty, our consciences, with an agenda contrary to God’s Law. Yet, now that some are starting to feeling that this cloud is being lifted, we are losing sight of charity. We are still called to live charitably, to love our neighbor, even if we are afraid.

Christ tells us many times in the Gospel who our neighbor is. Take the parable of the Good Samaritan as an example.

And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test, saying, "Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" He said to him, "What is written in the law? How do you read?" And he answered, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself." (Luke 10:25-27)

The lawyer proceeds to ask Jesus, “Who is my neighbor?” Christ responds with the parable of the Good Samaritan. If you recall, the story begins with a man going from Jerusalem to Jericho who falls among robbers. He is beaten and left half dead. Then two separate Israelite men, those who know the law and neglect charity for the sake of ritual cleanliness, pass this man on the road. Then a Samaritan comes along, a Samaritan who is an enemy of the Israelites. This Samaritan puts his own life at risk on this road frequented by robbers and his other enemies to bind of the wounds of the man, his traditional enemy. He brings the man to an inn and leaves money to pay for the care and recovery of this man.

[Jesus asked]“Which of these three, do you think, proved neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?" He said, "The one who showed mercy on him." And Jesus said to him, "Go and do likewise." (Luke 10:35-37)

The call of Christ to love those who hate us, those who are our enemies, is not an easy one. It is a much higher call than the regulatory laws of the Old Covenant. But it is also a reminder that there is much more at stake than our physical well being, while that is important, the life of our soul is not worth losing over the safety of our bodies. Yes, I am serious about this. The call to radical charity is one that we cannot overlook even in the face of danger. There are refugees seeking the aid of our country who are not Christian, a lot of them are Muslims, but we are called to love and welcome both. The global common good is a common good greater than that of our country. And each human being on this earth of ours is a human being made in the Image of God; every single one demands charity from us because they are human beings.

I think about the kind of nation I would want my children to live in, and while I would love for them to have peace and prosperity, I worry more about their immortal souls than whether or not they will be persecuted. I know that they will be. There is no denying that. Christ told us so: “In the world you will have tribulation; but be of good cheer, I have overcome the world” (John 16:33). The Christian has always been persecuted. The model of radical love is one that I want them to follow rather than that of cowering in fear behind the secure borders of our country.

It is time to overcome our fears and meet those different from us with radical charity, so that we might hope to be among the righteous.

Then the righteous will answer him, `Lord, when did we see thee hungry and feed thee, or thirsty and give thee drink?

And when did we see thee a stranger and welcome thee, or naked and clothe thee?

And when did we see thee sick or in prison and visit thee?'

And the King will answer them, `Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.' (Matthew 25:37-40)

I’m very disappointed with this article. While I agree wholeheartedly that we are to welcome the stranger, there’s nowhere in the Catechism that says we are to be stupid about it. During times of war the US has always exercised caution as to who gets in….....we are to use sound reasoning and intelligence along with compassion and mercy. Most of us keep our doors locked at night to keep our families safe - our country should do no less. Our leader’s first priority is to keep our country safe. We won’t be able to welcome refugees if our country is invaded by terrorists under the guise refugees.

Posted by Marcy on Tuesday, Feb, 21, 2017 12:18 PM (EDT):

I think this topic has always been difficult, but Christ’s teachings are clear. As someone else noted, I too would like to see an expansion of this article to include the understanding of how we are to treat different kinds of people who are trying to come to this country. What are we supposed to do about:
1) People who have come here illegally, whom we don’t know who they are.
2) People who are criminals and are here illegally, some of whom are already scheduled for deportation. What about the family they leave behind? Why haven’t they been deported.
3) People who are here illegally but brought as children and know no other country.
4) Muslims from terrorist nations, how are we to make sure they are not terrorists.
5) Should Christians from terrorist nations be “fast-tracked” in or helped to resettle in their own lands?

Should we try to help people in their own land, so as to avoid bringing people here?

In light of events in Europe centuries ago, where Muslims tried to conquer Europe, and were barely beaten back over hundreds of years: What are we supposed to do to avoid this same thing re-happening in Europe and then here?

How can we truly revamp our immigration policy to make it clear, fair, and timely. People come here illegally because they know it will take years and years and they may never get a clear answer, so they come because they can’t wait 20+ years to keep their family from whatever evil is happening where they live.

What do we do about the overwhelming of services in our country? For example, school systems, hospitals, Medicaid, etc. Should people here illegally be allowed these services?

These are all valid questions that should be discussed - but without anger and fear. Everyone is heated. I’m sure that both sides have many of the same concerns, but different ways of looking at solutions. What we need are solutions that actually work and are clear. Right now nothing is clear and the division isn’t helping matters. The evil one takes advantage of that.

We need to ask ourselves how Mother Teresa would act toward the less fortunate. Would she yell and be angry? Everyone on both sides needs to calm down, stop being scared, and try to have real solutions. Ignore the secular press, which is pushing its agenda, which includes causing division, and work together for real solutions.

Posted by Stephen on Tuesday, Feb, 21, 2017 10:53 AM (EDT):

A difficult issue for any Christian to be sure. There is a delicate balance to be achieved. Your article fails to do that. Look to the European contries that have a real mess on their hands to understand.

Posted by Clergy on Monday, Feb, 20, 2017 2:57 PM (EDT):

What utter foolishness in this attempt to use charity as an excuse to let the enemies into the city gates. Did the Jews bring Assyrians and Babylonians into Jerusalem? You know nothing about sharia law nor Islamic ideology if you think it is nothing to worry about. If you want to help Muslim immigrants, setup camps out in Middle east regions and guard those as necessary, while providing food.

Posted by Jorge on Saturday, Feb, 18, 2017 11:21 AM (EDT):

You have to choose.
If you are against immigrants, you cannot be a Christian.
If you want to defend your family or your nation against immigrants, of course you can do so, but you cannot call yourself a Christian any more. The immigrant is Christ Himself, and Christ is more important than your family or your nation. Christ said that we shall hate our family and our nation and love the foreigner.

So, if your irrational fear to lose earthly commodities is so strong that it makes you defy Christ Himself, nobody will hinder you to do that, but after death you will be thrown into the fire.
That is all we as Christians can say about this issue.
You have to choose. Loving Christ or loving yourself, that’s the issue.

Posted by Sean on Friday, Feb, 17, 2017 8:49 PM (EDT):

Madam Author,
Please get a grip of 21st century reality. My family will not be lambs led to the slaughter by those speaking happy-talk.
Your naivety is alarming and children deserve a better chance at survival. Good luck to them.
A serious reading of what happens under sharia law might do you some good. Focus on the humiliation of Dhminitude.

Posted by Julianne on Friday, Feb, 17, 2017 11:47 AM (EDT):

So let’s import unvetted Muslim migrants from socially regressive countries who hate America and will bring rape games, honor killings, child brides and female genital mutilation instead of Europeans who want to be integrated into our society. Makes so much sense.

Jesus requires us to import people who want to eradicate us and our way of life? Really?? These are potentially the same people who have persecuted and executed Christians in the Middle East and we are obliged them to bring them here and subsidize them with taxpayer money?

Posted by TLM on Friday, Feb, 17, 2017 9:45 AM (EDT):

What is the problem with people that write falsities like this? A completely RIDICULOUS theological perspective!!! These people are misrepresenting the Gospel of Jesus Christ!!!! Talk about living in LA LA LAND!!!!

Posted by taad on Thursday, Feb, 16, 2017 6:17 PM (EDT):

The author is making claims that she can not back up. If you let just one person in who has intent on attacking us from within, while we decide how to fix the problem, many, many people may die. Anyone who says you can check these people out from countries that are basically destroyed, and have no records to verify who they are, are lying. It is impossible to properly check these people out. So if your willing to see things like the multiple attacks in Europe, then yes, open the door and fix it in motion. But remember, you were okay with it, and the deaths are on you, the bishops, and the pope. Yet the pope is responsible for some the attacks in Europe even though he takes no responsibility for it. He’s the one pushing for unlimited immigration and the world without borders. So the blood is on his hands. He has gone into the area he has no authority to do so. He is no expert in this field. And those leaders in Europe who have gone along with this overflow of refuges are to blame for these deaths across Europe. The first duty of any country leader is the safety of their people. First and foremost.

Posted by Patrick O'Brien on Thursday, Feb, 16, 2017 5:12 PM (EDT):

“But since we know by faith that Christ will triumph in the end, we should let the radical charity that Christ calls us to trump the fear that we have of living under sharia law.” Yeah, and since Christ will triumph in the end, go ahead and rape my wife and murder my children. Since Christ will triumph in the end, don’t respond to any threat. Is this the best that The Register can do?

Posted by Leo Vuocolo on Thursday, Feb, 16, 2017 3:31 PM (EDT):

In Matthew 25:37-46 was Jesus signifying? Those of other faiths seeking refuge or his BRETHREN?

In Matthew 25:37-46 To whom does Jesus refer to as hungered, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked or sick, or in prison? WHO WERE JESUS BRETHREN?

Matthew 25:
40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

Matthew 10:
40 He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.

Matthew 12:
46 While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him.
47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.
48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren?
49 And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!
50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mo

Luke 10:
10 After these things the LORD appointed other seventy also, and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place, whither he himself would come.
16 He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me.

Anyone who befriends those whom Jesus is prepared to call my brethren in the hour of their need and persecution would do the same to their Master, if he had the chance… Since from His brethren he will expect more, not less, this can serve as a check on the reality of our profession. – The New Layman’s bible Commentary
We are finally reminded of the intimate relationship between the apostolic representative and the Master he represents. The rabbis repeatedly stressed, “A man’s representative is as the man himself”. – The New Layman’s bible Commentary

Posted by Ronald Sevenster on Thursday, Feb, 16, 2017 3:18 PM (EDT):

A completely misguided piece, full of basic theological errors. It is ridiculous to speek of “radical charity” in relation to the immigration policy of a country. The “radical charity” of the Gospel simply doesn’t apply to the State.

Posted by Deborah Johnson on Thursday, Feb, 16, 2017 2:56 PM (EDT):

It is an old Commie trick to make everyone equal. The author does this by not making a distinction between
those legal immigrants and the illegal aliens who have broken the immigration laws of the US.
An illegal that we know has been here for years… sure he sends money home but also lives in fear of deportation
and has not seen his family in years because the US does not allow him to go back to Mexico. If Catholics were
really merciful and imitated the Holy family who kept Jewish and Roman law then they would understand that
allowing illegal aliens into the US and not enforcing the law is breaking up families.

Posted by Justin on Wednesday, Feb, 15, 2017 11:30 PM (EDT):

Honor your father and mother

But you say that whoever tells father or mother, ‘Whatever support you might have had from me is given to God,’then that person need not honor the father. So, for the sake of your tradition, you make void the word of God. You hypocrites!

Honor widows who are really widows. If a widow has children or grandchildren, they should first learn their religious duty to their own family and make some repayment to their parents; for this is pleasing in God’s sight.

And whoever does not provide for relatives, and especially for family members, has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.

Posted by Leo Vuocolo on Wednesday, Feb, 15, 2017 4:47 PM (EDT):

2232 Family ties are important but not absolute. Just as the child grows to maturity and human and spiritual autonomy, so his unique vocation which comes from God asserts itself more clearly and forcefully. Parents should respect this call and encourage their children to follow it. They must be convinced that the first vocation of the Christian is to follow Jesus: “He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.” [Mt 10:37; cf. 16:25] [1618]

2233 Becoming a disciple of Jesus means accepting the invitation to belong to God’s family, to live in conformity with His way of life: “For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother, and sister, and mother.” [Mt 12:49] [542]
- Catechism of the Catholic Church

Posted by Justin on Wednesday, Feb, 15, 2017 1:36 PM (EDT):

I would respect the opinions of writers more if they were more consistent in what they are talking about. Are we talking about “immigrants” (AKA legal permanent resident AKA green card holders), illegal aliens, refugees, asylees, aliens with a visa, etc. These are all very distinct groups that must and should be treated differently. To equate a refugee with an illegal alien with an H1B visa holder with a legal permanent resident, etc. is wrong. You can’t prescribe a policy if you can’t understand who you are applying it to. That is the first mistake this author makes, and it isn’t her last.

Next, you need a little more education in the economic consequences of remittances. You say, “It is easy to look at those people and begrudge them their income being sent abroad, but rather than blame them for harming our economy, should we not look with generosity on the people being fed and clothed.” But such actions don’t just have negative consequences for American local and national economies, but also for the foreign economies where the money is sent. It creates a distortion that actually increases poverty in those locations and encourages more family members to do what the Joneses next door did by sending someone north to work and send money back. You are doing harm by promoting this, not feeding and clothing people.

And, it would be different if the Church and those like the author were willing to fund this with their own money. But instead they are trying to encourage us to give them money, which we don’t have, to engage in their own good works to make themselves feel like they are doing good despite the negative consequences of their actions.

You ask what type of country you want your children to inherit…well, they won’t have one if we continue our current course. The US is economically unstable and can’t last. And with the invasion of foreigners, it is little wonder that we are in decline as the country can’t sustain itself as a cohesive country. We are becoming more divided as immigration increases, especially with population groups that have no intention of adopting our culture, but rather want to remain who they are but just enjoy what our culture has created while destroying it. Your children won’t have a country to live in at this rate.

If you truly want to help people, then we need to stop the unprecedented levels of world migration that cannot be sustained and that will lead to more and more conflict. The solution is not to encourage and allow more migration that can’t be sustained, it is in addressing the ills where they are.

Posted by sarah mac on Wednesday, Feb, 15, 2017 1:31 PM (EDT):

You call the USA a rich nation,it’s not.
I believe the USA has the illusion of wealth. What I mean by that is this: it looks wealthy (or rich) to viewers, but truly it’s quite poor. A great example is a seemingly well-dressed person in line at a welfare office. What the onlooker doesn’t know is that his clothes were free, given to him as hand-me-downs. His bank account is empty and he has credit card debt that he will never pay off if his circumstances don’t change. He can’t buy food or pay rent without help and he just keeps growing his debt to get by. Is he rich because his clothes have a popular name brand?
I think not. A rich person or state is defined by one who has a surplus; more than is needed. The reported $19 trillion in debt is only the interest! The actual debt is much higher.
Please do not write about that which you haven’t researched or do not understand.

Join the Discussion

We encourage a lively and honest discussion of our content. We ask that charity guide your words.
By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our discussion guidelines.
Comments are published at our discretion. We won't publish comments that lack charity, are off topic, or are more than 400 words.
Thank you for keeping this forum thoughtful and respectful.

Susanna Spencer has a masters in theology from the Franciscan University of Steubenville. She is a writer and the theological editor for Blessed is She, and writes on her own blog Living With Lady Philosophy. She is a homeschooling mother of four and lives with her family in St. Paul, Minnesota.